I don't know the value of this but it may be of interest to some of you.
I own both the DP2M and the RX-1. In fact I also own a DP3M as well.
I have recently returned from 4 days photographing around the Somme in France. Pretty grim topic and not my first choice but I agreed to accompany a family member.
I am now processing the pictures and by chance I have a comparison shot between the DP2M and the RX-1. It pretty much summarises what I think of the two cameras.
Both shots were at f8 focussed on the foreground.
First up is the RX-1 shot of remembrance wreathes looking over the Somme plains at La Boiselle. I'd left the camera on iso640 by mistake.
I really like the colour rendition of the RX-1. Very film like. You have to be careful when converting to sRGB for the web that the colours do not oversaturate and I normally reduce before posting.
Next up is the Sigma DP2M shot.
Not suprisingly the DP2M has to my mind bags more definition that the RX-1, although it has a more subdued character as far as the colours are concerned.
Although it is horses for courses my feelings between the two cameras are as follows.
The RX-1 renders much more artistically than the DP2M. It suggests to me that the Sony developers think much more about the look and feel of what comes off the sensor rather than pure IQ. The DP2M shot is characteristically outstanding as far as IQ goes. You can clearly see that the green wheat crop is single stalks and even in the distance there is tons of definition. Quite amazing, really, for a compact camera (although we all know it is really more like a shrunk-down H4D!).
If I was exhibiting I would be tempted to go with the lesser definition of the Sony shot. I think a general audience would find it more appealing. However it is the DP2M shot which has ended up in my Flickr stream.
What do you think? I'd be interested to know.
PS Incidentally, and this a surprise to me - I used the DP3M much more than my DP2M.